wechat_distill_skill

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It describes the main action and return format but does not disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, required permissions (e.g., need prior chat history), rate limits, or side effects. Some context is provided but gaps remain.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is concise with clear front-loading. The first sentence captures the essence. The Args and Returns sections add needed detail, though the Returns line is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists. Still efficient overall.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With three parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and parameter explanations. However, it lacks context like prerequisites (e.g., need active chat history) or connection to sibling tools (e.g., wechat_save_skill for saving the distilled skill). Adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining chat_names as comma-separated list, message_limit as max messages, and output_format as 'markdown' or 'json'. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though more detail (e.g., allowed values for output_format) could help.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool distills personal communication style from chat history into a SKILL.md file. The verb 'distill' and resource 'personal communication style' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like wechat_save_skill or wechat_search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for analyzing chat style to create a skill, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., wechat_save_skill for saving already-created skills). No when-not-to or exclusions are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.